Robot Wars Wiki talk:Community Portal/Archive 1
Urgent discussion on moving forward with this Wiki It's clear for everyone to see that there has been a lot of disagreement on the Wiki recently and so I've set up this discussion to try and resolve the issues we're having so we can all move forward together, instead of arguing all the time. I hope that this discussion will lead to an agreement on how we are going to progress this Wiki in the future. 1. First, we need to have a discussion on which robots deserve their own articles as this is a major disagreement. I hope that every robot will eventually have its own article but there is a case that maybe we should prioritise the most notable ones first, before we move onto the minor competitors. Please give your opinions with reasoned arguments and hopefully we can get this resolved. 2. We also seem to have a disagreement over the house robot articles that were created by Toon Ganondorf. If you could please give your opinions on this too, then maybe we can decide what we are going to do to make sure that everyone is happy with these articles. 3. Another thing we have to start doing is think about categorising this Wiki. At the moment, no categories have been created and I think we should start creating some for easier navigation around the Wiki. I'm thinking of categories like 'Series 1 competitors', 'Series semi-finalists', 'World Championship competitors' that we can put at the bottom of certain pages to categorise the articles we have. I would welcome any suggestions for categories we should create. That's all I have right now but if there are any other issues you want to discuss and resolve, please do raise them here and we can discuss them. If we are going to resolve these disagreements we are all going to have to keep an open mind and be open to making compromises, as not everyone can have it the way they want it. That is the whole point of this discussion. Please join in the discussion and we can start moving on productively without disagreements and arguments, and we can make this Wiki a better source for information on all things Robot Wars. Christophee 14:01, 11 January 2009 (UTC) ::I have an idea. How about I change the articles on the house robots so that the format is similar to the competitor robots page. I have created a sandbox under my userpage for these purposes, allowing me to freely edit them. Is this acceptable? Toon Ganondorf (t ' OK, these are just my personal two cents on the matters. 1. I think we should take it in turns. If we look at the robots currently in the "Competitor robots" page, most of them have at least reached the semi-finals of the UK championships. I think that the Semi-Finalists should at least get their own article first. After all of them have been done, we can look into robots that have at least made the Heat Final and do articles for them. THEN we look at the "other" robots. It might be that only the most significant of these gets articles, but certainly those that have won or done well in a special event could at least get something (for example, Kan Opener has never won anything in the UK wars, but as being the winner of two consequtive annihilators, I don't see how it wouldn't get an article eventually). 2. The issue I have with the House Robot articles is that they're not consistant with what is given in the Competitor robot pages. If they were more like them, I think that would be OK. Obviously, we can't do battles, so perhaps most notable fights? 3. I think you've hit it right on the nose there. There's not much else I can say. Maybe we could also add "Seeded robots" to the list. That's just my thoughts on the matter. CBFan 21:17, 11 January 2009 (UTC) :Okay, thanks for giving your opinions on the subject. I'll probably get started with the categories sometime tomorrow. :Toon Ganondorf, do you agree with CBFan's idea about the robot articles? I think it's quite a good idea personally, and when we have finished all the semi-finalists you can bring back your Corkscrew and SMIDSY articles and we can move onto heat finalists. I think it would also be a good time to make a full list of every competitor robot from every series so that we have a page that links to all the new articles. :I'll leave the house robot articles to you guys as I'm not really interested in editing those, but I do think that somebody should create an infobox for house robots that we can use on their articles to house all the stats. I'll be happy to create it if nobody else does. :If you have any other suggestions, do keep them coming. Christophee 01:24, 12 January 2009 (UTC) I will take care of those House Robot articles. In addition, I would like to agree with everything, but would like to ask CBFan to stop being so impatient. If I make a mistake, correct it graciously, not snapping and being derisive and offensive. 'Toon Ganondorf (t ' 06:01, 12 January 2009 (UTC) : First of all, I am not snapping, second of all, you shouldn't really NEED to be making mistakes...most of the mistakes you seem to be making are on Battle results, and the results of every single battle in Robot Wars history is on this very Wikia. CBFan 15:20, 12 January 2009 (UTC) The second thing is that I am actually copying from another robots page, say Hypno-Disc. Hypno-Disc lost in the first round of the semis, so the result is marked lost in S6. However, S3 makes it through so I add another sectino but forget to change the result. It's sloppy, but not stupidity. 'Toon Ganondorf (t ' :Now, that's the thing. This is why I wrote all of the champions battle stats from scratch. It may seem time-consuming, but it'll help you in the long run. CBFan 23:12, 14 January 2009 (UTC) Robots series that should share an article Robots that are in a similar series, such as Sir Chromalot, Firestorm and Plunderbird, should have one article between them. Robots such as Killerhurtz and Terrorhurtz are similar enough to share an article, and you'll see that I made a robot profile for both, which I consider fine considering no information is repeated. However, the 'Wild Thing article was a hard one. Thing 2 was almost identical, so I included them in the article. The series 6 Wild Thing, however, is vastly different from the others. Therefore I made two infoboxes for the two different Wild THings. Is this acceptable for you guys? 'Toon Ganondorf (t ' 09:45, 12 January 2009 (UTC) My personal opinion on it is that there should be a page per team like for instance Firestorm and Groundhog would share one like in the books we would just include (as Groundhog) to anything that corresponds to that particular robot. :Now, here's something...what about robots that are by the same team, but compete seperatly from each other, in the same wars (such as Vader & IG-88, or Velocirippa & Mighty Mouse)? CBFan 22:50, 12 January 2009 (UTC) Yes. In cases like the ones you listed, they have seperate articles. However, I believe that one-off robots like Groundhog or Demon should merely be part of the larger article. I don't even know what they looked like. But robots like Sting and S3, Robot the Bruce and Chaos 2, etc should have two articles. Is this agreeable? 'Toon Ganondorf (t ' : I DID sign! And no, I don't really agree. In my opinion, you're hardly being very consistant...why you think Demon and Groundhog should be included within the Wild Thing and Firestorm articles (respectively), yet you think that Sting and Robot The Bruce should be seperate from S3 and Chaos 2 (again, respectively), is frankly beyond me. There's no difference, and we can't simply make exceptions. CBFan 22:50, 12 January 2009 (UTC) In my opinion, in most cases individual robots by the same team should have separate articles. For example, I would have separate articles for Terrorhurtz and Killerhurtz and I would even have separate articles for Chaos and Chaos 2. Some robots, like the various Firestorm robots, are so similar that there would be little point in creating five different articles, but I think that in most cases they should be separate. However, I am quite happy for people to include other robots by the same team in certain articles but I hope you won't mind if I were to eventually make a new article and move certain information to that one (like I was intending to do for Killerhurtz). As for Wild Thing, the two robots are regarded as the same robot in the same way that the Series 7 X-Terminator is regarded as the same as the previous version. I think that the Wild Thing article should just have one infobox with the most recent stats included, just like every other robot. Christophee 22:55, 12 January 2009 (UTC) :I'm not sure. If you want my personal opinion, that might just make it awkward and a bit cluttered...perhaps to the point of unneccessary. I think unless they are COMPLETELY seperate robots, such as Velocirippa & Mighty Mouse, rather than meerly evolutions, such as Killerhurtz & Terrorhurtz, they should be grouped together. In a sense, it's also conveiniant because at least we can see which robots are related to each other. :And more to the point, why give Chaos a seperate article from Chaos 2 when you just said that Wild Thing and Wild Thing 2 should share the same article? It's no different at all. And yes, it IS officially called "Wild Thing 2". CBFan 23:03, 12 January 2009 (UTC) We can see which robots are related to each other with the 'Other entries' section of the infobox. However, maybe we can include robots by the same team in the same article but I think we should change the way they are set out. First of all, we should probably have separate sections in the article for each robot so that we can distinguish which parts of the article relate to each separate robot. Also, each section would have its own infobox so that we can have the stats for each individual robot. And we should create articles for the other robots but just make them redirect to the main article. I imagine in some cases we might get some argument about which robot each article should be named after but we can discuss those issues as they come. And about the Wild Thing 2 thing, I didn't realise that it was known as 'Wild Thing 2' as I thought they just referred to it as 'Wild Thing' in the series. Forget the Chaos/Chaos 2 thing because I have come round to your argument as you can see from what I just said. Right now I am going to edit the Wild Thing article to make it just as I have described and everyone can see what I mean and tell me whether you like the idea. What do you all think of that suggestion? Christophee 23:15, 12 January 2009 (UTC) :I strongly disagree. The X-Terminator team changed their robot nearly every series, so there was no one robot that stood out. Wild THing, however, had the same design for 3 wars, maybe four, but you are suggesting that all of that be discarded for a one-off robot that didn't do any better than the rest of them. I think that the Wild Thing article is fine the way it is. 'Toon Ganondorf (t ' ::And be inconsistant with the rest of the Wikia? I'm sorry, but it doesn't work like that. And besides, that's not true and you know it. Technically, X-Terminator changed very little between Series 5 and 6...no more than Wild Thing did between 4 and 5. CBFan 08:00, 13 January 2009 (UTC) :That might be neccessary for some robots. For example, we have two robots in the course of the series called "Twister", one a Dutch robot, and the other from the "Beserk 2" team. Rare it may be, we might need to be careful when such occurances happen. List of robots I think we should finally get round to having a full list of every robot to have competed in Robot Wars, like the list that CBFan made on Wikipedia. Obviously, that page has gone a bit haywire since CBFan stopped editing it, but I think the basic format is good and I'm suggesting that we use it on this Wiki. If anybody has any other ideas, I'm all ears. Christophee 15:46, 29 January 2009 (UTC) :Oh, I'm all for recreating it, as well as adding the robots I missed out. If need be, I am also link an article to some of the less significant robots for each series, the Extreme only robots and the international robots to have competed. I'm just thinking that trying to create an article for a robot like, say, Psychosprout may be a little difficult. :At any rate, I'll see what I can do. Should we use the most up-to-date robot in the list, or the most significant? CBFan 16:21, 29 January 2009 (UTC) I think the most significant might be better, but we might get disputes about which robot in each robot series was the most significant. Hopefully we'll all be able to agree though, on the article's talk page if necessary. I think eventually we should have pages to group the minor robots that don't have articles, so we at least have some information on them. For now, I think we have more pressing matters though. Christophee 16:30, 29 January 2009 (UTC) :Indeed. At the moment, I've got plans for the next bunch of articles. Which reminds me, maybe we should have a new template for the rest of the robots. CBFan 17:02, 29 January 2009 (UTC)